A party of terrorists from the Israeli "Flotilla 13" naval unit were recently repelled from Lebanese territory.

The Israeli invasion of Lebanese territory near the port city of Sidon, (which was lately shelled by Israeli-controlled "militia," with at least six Lebanese civilians dead), was defeated by the Shiite Amal fighters of Lebanon. Twelve Israeli assassins were killed.

This Israeli state terrorist unit is responsible for kidnappings and assassinations such as that of Khalil al-Wazir, a Palestinian dissident, in Tunisia. Wazir, better known as Abu Jihad, was killed by Flotilla 13. The Israeli terrorists also carried out the murders of Palestinian leaders in Beirut in 1973.

Amal officials in Lebanon confirmed that the Israeli terrorists were in Lebanon on a mission of kidnapping and assassination when they were defeated by Lebanese defenders outside Sidon.

The New York Times and other Jewish-controlled newspapers did not describe the Israelis of Flotilla 13 as invaders or terrorists. Rather the Times referred to their attack in Lebanon in sanitized Orwellian terms as "preventive action inside Lebanon" (N.Y. Times, Sept. 6, 1997).

Meanwhile, Israel's Channel 2 news program said Infrastructures Minister Ariel Sharon, the Jewish war criminal who led the invasion of Lebanon in 1982, argued that the Israelis should avoid dangerous Flotilla 13 operations and instead strike at "civilian infrastructures" in Lebanon.

How's that for advocacy of naked terror? Sharon openly calls for attacks on "civilian infrastructures," a repeat of the 1996 Israeli holocaust against Lebanon during which cities, towns, water and electrical systems were destroyed, crippling the struggling nation, and resulting in heavy Lebanese civilian casualties.

These Israeli crimes reflect vintage Allied policy in force for more than 50 years:

1. First dehumanize the civilian population (as the Allies did to German and Japanese women and children during W.W. II and to Iraqi women and children during "Operation Desert Storm").

2. Utilize air force bombing against those "Kraut," "Nip" and "Camel-rider" civilians.

The Establishment media have generally never been indignant or analytical in the face of Allied genocide. The U.S. and British media support it, through incorporation of Allied military Newspeak into their news reports. They accept the Allied notion that terrorism perpetrated by an Allied government cannot be terrorism.

Allied dogma holds that terrorism can only be perpetrated by "Shiites" and "Hamas" and "Qaddafi," or "Iran" or "the neo-Nazis."

Terrorism, in the Allied fantasy, has a proprietary relationship with the enemies of the Allies and cannot, by its very definition, be applied to the Allies themselves.

This is why only Serbs and Croats are on show trial at the Hague for "war crimes." Jews, again by definition, cannot be war criminals-- neither Soviet Communist Jews or Israeli Jews--no matter how many war crimes they commit.

David Axelrod is the great-grandson of Jewish Communist mass murderer Leon Trotsky, who slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Russian Christians. Axelrod is a Zionist who resides in occupied Palestine. In 1990 he murdered an elderly, unarmed Palestinian couple.

Can one imagine the field day the U.S. and British media would have had with the news that the great-grandson of Heinrich Himmler had murdered an elderly Jewish couple? The headlines would have gone around the world, out to the galaxy and been read by the inhabitants of the Milky Way.

But did you ever hear of Axelrod or his murderous crime? Of course not. Media "discretion" prevails. He is Jewish, one of the Herrenvolk, the Master Race, therefore his terrorism is not terrorism and the same goes for the ocean of blood his great-grandfather poured over Mother Russia. Trotsky's acts were not war crimes. They were "preventive actions."

These fictions are imbibed by the masses in America and the British Commonwealth, but not by much of the rest of the world. In the Middle East, this double-standard kindles ever more Muslim and Arab rage, which the Americans and British then pretend not to understand and find "appalling."

But the British and Americans have manufactured the rage with their mocking human rights rhetoric, which contrasts so dismally with the their actual record of selective indignation concerning whose rights will be defended and whose will be systematically eradicated.

The terms "war criminal" and "terrorist" have been cynicaly politicized to gain real politik advantage in statecraft. The Allies have been execrable hypocrites in this arena for more than 50 years and while they can force their vast communications media upon the world, they cannot invest their Newspeak with credibility or compel the world to believe it.